2024 (1) TMI 1199 - SCH - Income Tax

Penalty levied for inaccurate particulars of income - As per AO assessee treated the revenue receipt of subsidy as capital receipt - debatable issue - as per HC no error in the findings recorded by Tribunal while setting aside penalty as there is no dispute about the quantum of receipt of grant in aid from the State Government. The assessee reflected the same as capital receipt, whereas it has been treated as to be revenue receipt. The issue; whether the amount of grant in aid is capital receipt or a revenue receipt, is a debatable issue. HELD THAT - Additional Solicitor General, has in his usual fairness stated the correct position of law as it exists in the facts and circumstances of the case. Taking note of the legal position, the Special Leave Petitions are dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Summary

The Supreme Court, with Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar, dismissed the Special Leave Petitions after considering the correct position of law presented by Mr. N Venkatraman, the Additional Solicitor General. Pending applications were disposed of as well. (Case Citation: 2024 (1) TMI 1199 - SC Order)